Opinion of Lionel Jospin

[Antonio the Sixth]

They spoke about him on France Inter today so I had the idea to make this poll.

Massive FF for me. A true Social-Democrat, who led real reforms but always refused ideology and populism (that's why medias consider him as a "bad campaigner"). Embodied the honesty against "super-menteur". While he perfectly knew that the State couldn't do everything, he never renounced to make him do his job.
The best PM of the Vth Republic for me. His only mistake was to withdraw, letting his party void.

[Bo]

FF. He didn't really appear to have done antyhing wrong, other than lose the first round in 2002 by running a poor campaign. If he would have ran a better campaign, he and Chirac would likely have advanced to the second round and he would have likley defeated Chirac. Of course, then, I'm not sure if Sarkozy would be the current President, and he's my favorite French President in the last 50+ years. BTW, why did many so liberals vote against Jospin in the first round (in 2002)?

[Hash]

BTW, why did many so liberals vote against Jospin in the first round (in 2002)?

Go away and come back when you understand European politics and political terms.

You're lucky I didn't kill you for that statement, which is the first contender for Stupid Quote of 2010.

[Associate Justice PiT]

BTW, why did many so liberals vote against Jospin in the first round (in 2002)?

Go away and come back when you understand European politics and political terms.

You're lucky I didn't kill you for that statement, which is the first contender for Stupid Quote of 2010.

     Yeah, I think we need to start a serious campaign against the rampant misuse of terms like liberal in the United States. I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who finds it infuriating.

[Хahar 🤔]

BTW, why did many so liberals vote against Jospin in the first round (in 2002)?

Because Jospin wasn't a liberal.

[Antonio the Sixth]

BTW, why did many so liberals vote against Jospin in the first round (in 2002)?

If, as it seems, by "liberals" you mean "left-wingers" (which in french politics is a colossal mistake), here is what happened. First of all, all the parties members of the Gauce Plurielle (ie the incumbent left-wing coalition) ran a candidate and dumbly cirticized the government they were in because of petty electoral strategies. Since Jospin was, indeed, a poor campaigner, he failed to respond to populist criticizing his political action as "liberal" (=economically conservative). As a result, the far-left exploited this to gather almost 10% of the votes (by the so-called "disappointed by Jospin's right-wing policies" -which is just ridiculous).
To put it clearly, the french left is once again victim of its most radical elements, who, by refusing to choose between "la peste et le coléra", always make fail a competent and reformist government because it doesn't go so far as they wished. Nowadays, the best alliees of Sarkozy are Mélenchon and Besancenot.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

No Antonio, the far-left is as officially as officiously very logical. First, officially, they call for their radical ideas in the 1st round as the legitimate expressions of the one's idea, and in the 2nd round they always call for the PS. And, officiously, no matter whether what they can do makes pass the right, they are not interested in mild solutions like PS can propose, then they don't really care if they pass or not, and the more a govt will be on the right, the more they will see it as good for them. And that's why Besancenot has never been so popular since Sarkozy is in power... They are as logical as legitimate to act like this, you just don't share their ideas...

About Jospin in general, well if the guy had learned more about empathy, communication, psychology, and about an actual humility, maybe he would have provoked more adhesion to him, he just definitely wasn't a statesman, a political leader. He was super technocrat, a brilliant one, but one. He should have wondered about it or have chosen a better candidate than him to run in order to have chances to win.

For example, if he had more humility and/or psychology he would have passed the phone call to Christianne Taubira, the one she was waiting for, in order to resign, she said she was just waiting for a phone call of Jospin to resign before the campaign (with Taubira votes he was largely in the 2nd run), he knew it, and never did it, surely too proud of himself.

A good manager, that's all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

No Antonio, the far-left is as officially as officiously very logical. First, officially, they call for their radical ideas in the 1st round as the legitimate expressions of the one's idea, and in the 2nd round they always call for the PS. And, officiously, no matter whether what they can do makes pass the right, they are not interested in mild solutions like PS can propose, then they don't really care if they pass or not, and the more a govt will be on the right, the more they will see it as good for them. And that's why Besancenot has never been so popular since Sarkozy is in power... They are as logical as legitimate to act like this, you just don't share their ideas...

It all depends of your definition of "mild". Those people at far-left do as if Government could do everything, solve every problem in a snap. With the globalization, the collapse of old-age pensions system and the European exigences, Jospin's reforms were all but mild. It was the best he could do, at least on a "social" point of view.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, he is a true statesman in the sense that he wasn't a politician. He wasn't interested in pleasing the opinion, wasn't constatly exploiting fears or unreasonable hopes. His loss shows how few voters care of integrity and competence.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

No Antonio, the far-left is as officially as officiously very logical. First, officially, they call for their radical ideas in the 1st round as the legitimate expressions of the one's idea, and in the 2nd round they always call for the PS. And, officiously, no matter whether what they can do makes pass the right, they are not interested in mild solutions like PS can propose, then they don't really care if they pass or not, and the more a govt will be on the right, the more they will see it as good for them. And that's why Besancenot has never been so popular since Sarkozy is in power... They are as logical as legitimate to act like this, you just don't share their ideas...

It all depends of your definition of "mild". Those people at far-left do as if Government could do everything, solve every problem in a snap. With the globalization, the collapse of old-age pensions system and the European exigences, Jospin's reforms were all but mild. It was the best he could do, at least on a "social" point of view.

Euh, they have radical ideas, they just don't care about all of this. That's what we call revolutionary ideas, you don't share them, but that are their ideas, and they are legitimate and logical with themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, he is a true statesman in the sense that he wasn't a politician. He wasn't interested in pleasing the opinion, wasn't constatly exploiting fears or unreasonable hopes. His loss shows how few voters care of integrity and competence.

No, an actual statesman should at least handle a bit of psychology, which doesn't necessarily mean populism. Hell, we're speaking about politics here, aren't we? The art of the compromise, right?

[Antonio the Sixth]

No Antonio, the far-left is as officially as officiously very logical. First, officially, they call for their radical ideas in the 1st round as the legitimate expressions of the one's idea, and in the 2nd round they always call for the PS. And, officiously, no matter whether what they can do makes pass the right, they are not interested in mild solutions like PS can propose, then they don't really care if they pass or not, and the more a govt will be on the right, the more they will see it as good for them. And that's why Besancenot has never been so popular since Sarkozy is in power... They are as logical as legitimate to act like this, you just don't share their ideas...

It all depends of your definition of "mild". Those people at far-left do as if Government could do everything, solve every problem in a snap. With the globalization, the collapse of old-age pensions system and the European exigences, Jospin's reforms were all but mild. It was the best he could do, at least on a "social" point of view.

Euh, they have radical ideas, they just don't care about all of this. That's what we call revolutionary ideas, you don't share them, but that are their ideas, and they are legitimate and logical with themselves.

Here is the point. When you are a "revolutionary", you don't care about external reality. You just see something unfair and say "let's change it". How ? Who cares ? That's why they are useless and even counterproductive for real progress forces. The far-left being a thorn in the left's side is an historical constant.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, he is a true statesman in the sense that he wasn't a politician. He wasn't interested in pleasing the opinion, wasn't constatly exploiting fears or unreasonable hopes. His loss shows how few voters care of integrity and competence.
[/quote]

No, an actual statesman should at least handle a bit of psychology, which doesn't necessarily mean populism. Hell, we're speaking about politics here, aren't we? The art of the compromise, right?
[/quote]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

Yes, but that's something! He made lose his camp for this! And then his ideas! That's why the reproach concerning his miss of humility (not to have tried to promote someone more fit than him, or not to tried to make some work on him about it) and/or his miss of psychology can be significant in a critic about him, since he claimed for responsibilities.

[Antonio the Sixth]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

Yes, but that's something! He made lose his camp for this! And then his ideas! That's why the reproach concerning his miss of humility (not to have tried to promote someone more fit than him, or not to tried to make some work on him about it) and/or his miss of psychology can be significant in a critic about him, since he claimed for responsibilities.

On the other side, he would, if elected, have been far more effective to push for left-wing ideas than someone else.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

Yes, but that's something! He made lose his camp for this! And then his ideas! That's why the reproach concerning his miss of humility (not to have tried to promote someone more fit than him, or not to tried to make some work on him about it) and/or his miss of psychology can be significant in a critic about him, since he claimed for responsibilities.

On the other side, he would, if elected, have been far more effective to push for left-wing ideas than someone else.

Euh, you wanna try to convince a revolutionary in a debate about it? Or just a far-leftist?? He just has to pronounce to 'Barcelone', and it makes Jospin out about going far on the left.

[Antonio the Sixth]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

Yes, but that's something! He made lose his camp for this! And then his ideas! That's why the reproach concerning his miss of humility (not to have tried to promote someone more fit than him, or not to tried to make some work on him about it) and/or his miss of psychology can be significant in a critic about him, since he claimed for responsibilities.

On the other side, he would, if elected, have been far more effective to push for left-wing ideas than someone else.

Euh, you wanna try to convince a revolutionary in a debate about it? Or just a far-leftist?? He just has to pronounce to 'Barcelone', and it makes Jospin out about going far on the left.

I'll never try to convince a revolutionary of anything. I'm not saying this with any hatred : the family of my cousins are in the NPA (and in the LCR before). But I now feel more confortabe arguing with a french right-winger than with a far-leftist.
The one I was trying to convince now is you, FYI.

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

You're right on this. Anyways his unability to win elections and to be popular is the only thing you can reproach him.

Yes, but that's something! He made lose his camp for this! And then his ideas! That's why the reproach concerning his miss of humility (not to have tried to promote someone more fit than him, or not to tried to make some work on him about it) and/or his miss of psychology can be significant in a critic about him, since he claimed for responsibilities.

On the other side, he would, if elected, have been far more effective to push for left-wing ideas than someone else.

Euh, you wanna try to convince a revolutionary in a debate about it? Or just a far-leftist?? He just has to pronounce to 'Barcelone', and it makes Jospin out about going far on the left.

I'll never try to convince a revolutionary of anything. I'm not saying this with any hatred : the family of my cousins are in the NPA (and in the LCR before). But I now feel more confortabe arguing with a french right-winger than with a far-leftist.
The one I was trying to convince now is you, FYI.

Oh ok, then well, I'd answer that I think he wouldn't have been much further than he had already been (it was impossible to go further than 35h and CMU). Anyways, we will never know, and mainly because of his...again ...miss of psychology and/or humility. Jospin is the main responsible for his defeat in 2002, as I tried to pointed out here.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'd answer that I think he wouldn't have been much further than he had already been (it was impossible to go further than 35h and CMU).

Well, IMO there's always a way to improve the social system, in any country. However, it's probably true that, with the lower growth, Jospin's term as President would have been more difficult. He probably would have passed more unpopular laws, such as a reform of old-age pension system. In this sense, he would probably have governed more to the right (though less to the right and above all less stupidly than Raffarin and Villepin). So yeah, he would have focused on "rigeur" and would have become unpopular. But still, he'd do the best he reasonably can.